Round about some of the NH Conservative sites - week of 1/222/10 - Granite Grok

Round about some of the NH Conservative sites – week of 1/222/10

Obviously, the buzz was all about Scott Brown’s cashiering (at least for the immediate time) of the "Kennedy seat" and of Obamacare.  Right up front is this from Paul at Pun Salad that PERFECTLY encapsulates how Progressives see ordinary citizens – and why we resent them and their Progressive-in-Chief:

Mr. Kristol notes the condescension in this Obama interview.

Here’s my assessment of not just the vote in Massachusetts, but the mood around the country. The same thing that swept Scott Brown into office swept me into office. People are angry, and they’re frustrated. Not just because of what’s happened in the last year or two years, but what’s happened over the last eight years.

In short: Voters are motivated by their childish temper tantrums. Clever politicians, like Scott Brown and me, take advantage.

Gee, it can NEVER be a politician’s or his policies fault, can it?

As if on cue, Mr. Will makes a related point:

The 2008 elections gave liberals the curse of opportunity, and they have used it to reveal themselves ruinously. The protracted health-care debacle has highlighted this fact: Some liberals consider the legislation’s unpopularity a reason to redouble their efforts to inflict it on Americans who, such liberals think, are too benighted to understand that their betters know best. The essence of contemporary liberalism is the illiberal conviction that Americans, in their comprehensive incompetence, need minute supervision by government, which liberals believe exists to spare citizens the torture of thinking and choosing.

Again: they think we’re children. Good to know. Good to remember. 

Indeed – we are not smart enough to make our own decisions – we are not to be trusted – but they think that THEY are???

*****

Yet, as Chris from Radioactive Liberty points out, they certainly were adult enough to see "Marcia Chokely" happen in MA this past week:

The 2010 Massachusetts US Senate Special Election became the political equivalent of the deer waking up in the back seat in Tommy Boy. It was weird.

*****

He really is good on taxes – growing up in MA, I’m quite familiar with Barbara Anderson and her CLT (Citizens for Limited Taxation) group – Ed Naile at NH Insider shows his rating with CLT:

  • 1999-2000     75%
  • 2001-2002    100%
  • 2003-2004     97%
  • 2005-2006     73%
  • 2007-2008     93%
  • 2009 –         100%

Barbara says they have some more good candidates in Massachusetts(e)* waiting in the wings.

And by the way, 25% is what most Democrats get for a CLT rating.

He also gets a jab in our Sr. Senator, Judd Gregg concerning how to rein in the deficit:

Ladies and gentlemen, I have here in this bottle a cure-all for whatever ailes ya, be it the shivers, fever, consumption or over-consumption. Step up to the wagon and behold the liquid miracle cure sure to dampen your liquidity. Its called the “Bipartisan Task Force for Responsible Fiscal Action Act of 2009,” sponsored by Sens. Kent Conrad (D-ND) and Judd Gregg (R-NH).

Yessiree fine taxpaying citizens, this miracle cure comes with a GUARANTEE! It is guaranteed to cost you more and more and more of your hard earned income because this little mixture has a tried and true secret formula.

Here it is:

Ten Democrats + eight Republicans form a bipartisan task force to decide if YOU need more taxes! How can you beat that?

More important, how can WE lose?

Like many, I KNOW this is a magnificently stupid idea – why the duplication of effort??  We already have a bipartisan committee – made up of the US House of Representatives and the US Senate.  My gosh – all this idea is does is allow these chuckleheads avoid what we sent them to DC for in the first place – Make The Hard Decisions!!

*****

Let me throw this in here: Maggie’s Farm brings a great idea up; especially as Obama and the Dems are trying to do the same for "corporate excesses":

Bloomberg Blasts Obama’s War On Wall Street, Says Congress Salaries Should Be Held In Escrow For 10 Years Until We See How Their Laws Worked Out

Please?

*****

Richard, also at NH Insider has this on Free Speech:

This is nothing more then Democrats wanting to find ways to shut funding down to anyone they don’t like while continuing to allow their own groups like Unions free reign and when they aren’t allowed to get their way they cry foul and claim the sky is falling.

*****

Steve from NH Insider has this on the stage craft for Obamacare.  However, it points out that if Government DOES take over healthcare, its claws will be out for more:

So who made this call in the White House?  Michelle Obama has been cut loose on her fledgling political career as the new head of a program to address diet and exercise.  Now it’s obvious that this project wasn’t thrown together over the weekend.  It was planned in advance to be deployed in the shadow of what was supposed to be successful health care reform.   And tucked inside a centrally planned bureaucracy designed to give the government power to regulate diet—which a taxpayer funded health care system would have given them—controlling behavior could be justified as a way to save taxpayer dollars and even sold as a way to reduce the deficit.  “Help cut the fat from America’s diet and the fat from America’s deficit at the same time.”  (just as long as we forget how the deficit got that big).

Progressivism – it is ALWAYS and ONLY about the control; after all, the rest of us are mere dolts in their sights – eat your veggies, children!

*****

MoultonboroSpeaks has yet another way that people use government for their own benefit rather than solving an actual problem:

Following is a rough transcript that someone on the Winnipesaukee Forum put together after watching the video of part of Betsey’s legislative update at the BoS meeting on January 7th, 2010.

This is in reference to the Braun Bay rafting bill that Betsey has proposed, HB 1466.

“I also put in a bill about the rafting that is happening, how many boats are in Braun Bay and that hearing will be coming up on the 21st which is probably next week?, next week the 28th? No, …………….“Well what happens is that you can, I think you can put 3 boats together in a raft, what happens at Braun Bay is that there is multiples of 3 and it just grows and grows and grows and I have gotten complaints, and I have always heard that under the law enforcement on the water, there wasn’t anything that law enforcement on the land can do unless marine patrol was out there, and so I wanted to be able to…what I put in was to limit how many rafting conglomerations can be out there, Say you can put three rafts of three out there, I don’t know where it’s going to go. The hearing is, I’m going to ask people for their input that are down in Braun Bay and we’ll see what happens with that so, every time I get a complaint it’s like lets talk about it and lets see if we can do ..mumbles….”

Betsey Patten

Nice and clear now…. right? It’s painfully obvious Ms. Patten is not comfortable talking about her very own bill and very clear she doesn’t understand the current law. Why then introduce a bill? Because a very small number of very wealthy lake front property owners in and around Braun Bay want to maintain their “private” lakefront. These wealthy few got in Betsey’s ear and an ill conceived bill is on the table, a bill that would further restrict the general public from utilizing a public treasure.

Makes me wonder….a lot …about all her other bills. Seat of the pants legislating. Not a good way to represent contituents.  

Political favors – as Government gets bigger and spends more (like it has under Gov. "Do Nuttin’" Lynch and the Democrats), there are more and more chances for this to happen.

Even when it is a Republican doing it; thanks Betsy

*****

Dan over at Granite State Pundit agrees with me and Charles Krauthammer: Charles Krauthammer  says we are seeing the fall of Obama.

*****

Drew Cline at the Union Leader takes Gov. John "Do Nuttin’" Lynch on his claim for helping to lower the high school dropout rate:

Gov. John Lynch said today:

We’ve recognized that a high school diploma is the minimum a student needs to enter today’s workforce, and we’ve made it a priority to help every student graduate from high school.

Beginning this year, the compulsory attendance age is now 18 – a change that is already reducing our dropout rate and sending a strong message to our children about the importance of a high school diploma. To help more children succeed, we’ve expanded alternative education – offering students options for night school, real-world learning or to earn GEDs.

I am proud to announce today that our efforts are showing results. The number of our students dropping out of high school decreased by more than 30 percent just last year.

And 24 of New Hampshire’s high schools last year cut their dropout numbers by at least 50 percent.

He seemed to suggest that raising the dropout age to 18 helped produce the big reduction in dropouts, but that law hasn’t taken effect yet.

The other changes could’ve helped, but can they possibly explain such a large reduction in the number of dropouts?

I think a much more likely explanation is the recession and the increase in the minimum wage, both of which sharply reduced jobs for unskilled workers. With few if any jobs to jump to, why not stay in school? 

Frankly, I think it turns the high schools into high priced day cares for a lot of these "adults" – and if they don’t drop out and do get a degree, do you think it is an earned diploma or one given for "showing up" or a "social diploma"?

*****

John Distaso in the Union Leader brings up a portending of an ugly message:

Former "Buchananite" Paul Nagy, who directed Buchanan’s state campaign in 1992, said the burgeoning conservative movement has him thinking of running for governor or U.S. senator.

"We have a re-emergence of a fight for the heart and soul of our country," he said. "Brown and Coakley are definitely part of a bigger thing that’s going on."

The GOP "needs to assimilate the tea party movement," to be successful, said Nagy.

No, it’s not Nagy – it is what the first TEA Party is going to do when they meet up with Nagy with full knowledge of "assimilation".  He REALLY doesn’t get it – many of the TEA Party folks still and often think that the Republican Party is just another branch, like the Democrats, of the Borg.

Assimilate this! sir….

And I’m being nice…go ahead and run – meet my frien
ds with the signs….

*****

Shades of Tip O’Neil’s "All politics is local" meme from Wolfeboro Politics:

I cannot help but draw parallels between events that propelled Scott Brown into the US Senate and the status of things here in Wolfeboro. In both cases, there is a lack of transparency and engagement with the voting public that caused ire and distrust to rise to levels that prompted action at the polls. Washington was too wrapped up in its own “glory” and processes to have a real conversation with the American public. Don’t we have the same issues here in Wolfeboro?

*****

I take exception to Ed over at The Ed Mosca Blog:

Yet here in New Hampshire there is an element of the GOP that appears to be as politically tone deaf as Obama and Pelosi.  I am referring to the effort to have town meetings vote on gay marriage and to repeal a rule prohibiting firearms in the Statehouse.

Take a hint from Massachusetts people, these issues are not remotely on the voters’  radar screens.  Pushing these issues at this time  makes the GOP look out of touch and potentially squanders the opportunity to achieve historic results in the November 2010 elections by allowing the Democrats to divert attention from the fiscal mess they have made.

Wrong.  Why should the GOP cede the social issues to the Dems and Progressives?  All they seem to do is to undercut the underlying Christian heritage that our Founders proclaimed so loudly that our new representative republic requires – and then expect things will go well? Social issues matter as well – after all, if one just looks at the intensity of the gay lobby here in NH and what the Dems have done for "social legislation", it is yet more incoming bottles being thrown at people who believe in the opposite direction.  People are getting steamed about it….

*****

Priceless from Cathy at Citizens for Reasonable and Fair Taxes – Croydon:

The following is the speech that Jim presented to the education committee.

My Dear Wormwood,

You have failed yet again. The Enemy threatens Our Father Below with HB1580, a bill designed to strengthen the family bond we’ve labored so hard to destroy. With HB1580, we lose the ability to create a monolithic secular culture through absolute educational uniformity. HB1580 takes the power of indoctrination away from our education complex and gives it to weak individuals. This pains me even more than that nauseatingly holy Bill Of Rights.

Think of it. These offspring will spend more time on science, literature, culture and the arts and neglect the important topics like pop culture, political correctness, and sex education. Allowing parents to confer educational and cultural values to their children without our oversight risks a land filled with open minds, individual thoughts, and dedication to family. You must not let this happen.

The dangers of educational excellence are only the beginning. Should HB1580 pass, parents and their children will grow together accustomed to a life guided by their own morality and intellectual prowess instead of our diabolical collective guidance. Hell forbid, they might actually get used to freedom itself.

Time is short, you must whisper to these lawmakers quickly. Say that parents can’t be trusted with education. Remind them that they owe their allegiance to the special interest groups in education, that ordinary people are simply a nuisance. Your task depends on making these lawmakers neglect the goodness education freedom brings. Our Father Below is counting on you.

Your Affectionate Uncle,

Screwtape

*****

Jeff at A Rendezvous with Destiny on the MA Senate race:

It is more than just Republican against Democrat, Liberal against Conservative; it is the understanding of the principle that we are a representative republic and not an elected aristocracy. It is the appreciation of knowing that it is the “people’s seat,” and not the throne of a self-professed nobility, who believe that it is their seat to hand down from one lord to the next. It is the hope that every generation remembers that it is the elected who answers to the people, and that change can never come at the expense of our founding principles…….. "Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness…” …

*****

Granite Viewpoint does the work our NH Legislators won’t do – what’s the cost for the benefit – in this case, making antifreeze less appealing to dogs:

To compute the cost, I decided to go with a national estimate, since NH specific numbers were too hard to find. First, I learned that as many as 10,000 pets die each year in the US as a result of antifreeze poisoning.

Next, I found a rough cost estimate from this 2005 US Senate committee report on the issue:

Under S. 1110, if the CPSC determines that the use of the bittering agent in engine coolant or antifreeze would have no adverse effects on the environment, coolant and antifreeze manufacturers would be required to add the agent to certain product mixtures. The bill would exempt coolant and antifreeze distributed to original manufacturers (such as motor vehicle manufacturers) and garages that purchase wholesale engine coolant or antifreeze for purposes other than retail sales. According to industry sources, about 160 million gallons of coolant and antifreeze are sold in the U.S. retail market each year. Industry and government sources indicate that adding the bittering agent to product mixtures would cost manufacturers less than $0.03 per gallon of coolant or antifreeze. Furthermore, the industry expects to incur some costs associated with upgrades necessary for storing denatonium benzoate at manufacturing plants. Industry sources estimate such costs to fall between $50,000 and $70,000 per plant. Based on those data, CBO estimates that the costs associated with this mandate would not exceed $6 million per year.

This is all pretty rough, but it should be good enough for a ball park estimate. The CBO cost figure of $6 million per year along with an (admittedly high) estimate of 10,000 pets saved per year, yields a cost per pet saved of around $600.

Laws have costs – would most people want them if they knew the TRUE cost of each law?

*****

Lighthouse Patriot Journal has more on why the public are turning on Obama, his policies, and those that support them (emphasis mine):

The message here is that those of the Obama Nation membership are finding out that Tea Party protestors and citizens exercising their liberties as well as telling ALL politicians that
the grassroot Americans don’t want the push for a Nanny State and want the Jeffersonian Republic back. They are tired of footing the bill for a runaway deficit, forced to pay high taxes used for special interests, vote buying, non-transparent government, big government spending, misappropriation of funds, using tax funds for charity, [*] and the disrespect of constitutional law and the American people.

Indeed, during Clinton’s administration, he publicly implied that the American people couldn’t handle the responsibility of their own retirement fund program, so wouldn’t agree to side with the idea of slowly turning the dysfunctional Social Security and immigration program over to the hands of the individual citizens, if they so choose.

The Obama Nation crowd is no different, they are worse.  Nancy Pelosi stated:

Massachusetts has health care and so the rest of the country would like to have that too. So we don’t think a state that already has health care should determine whether the rest of the country should.

Plain in simple, the Democrat leadership and Republicans like GW Bush tell the American people what’s good for them because, in their opinion, the American citizen can’t handle the responsibility of taking care of themselves. Observing the habits and attitudes of some Americans, they are partly right – however, freedom of choice must always be maintained, and those that choose must face the responsibility of living with the decision they make within the freedom of choice.

…How many of us have made mistakes during the course of life? Are we to go to a government office and have people who look at the populace as peasants and/or dunces to govern our personal lives?

We allow this constantly by electing officials who believe Marxist nonsense.

What the message was in Massachusetts revealed: The government elite, the good old boys in federal (and state) government have pissed off the those who have remained silent for too long…

…Those we elect should be those that are better than the average in society. If we do not elect men and women with good character, integrity, honesty and the desire to uphold and protect the US Constitution and its Bill of Rights – how do we expect to have a strong and stable country?

*****

We started with what the buzz was; Maggie’s Farm reminds us of why it existed in the first place:

From Roger Kimball’s excellent Obama Gets It Right on the core political issues:

What are those issues? One concerns the proper role of government in American life.  The Constitution was primarily an effort to define, to set limits, to the power of the state. The Founders understood both the need for  federalism and the dangers of statism. In their effort to “form a more perfect Union” and “secure the Blessings of Liberty  to ourselves and our Posterity,” they were everywhere at pains to circumscribe the reach of state power. Having tasted tyranny first hand, and having pondered the melancholy lessons of history, they understood the awful metabolism of servitude. President Obama was quite right when, way back in 2001,  he described the Constitution as “a charter of negative liberties.”  What he did not understand then — and what he clearly still cannot get his mind around — is that fact that this “negative,” “merely formal” quality of the Constitution is one of its great strengths, not a weakness. In 2001, Senator Obama complained that the Constitution only told you what the state and federal government “can’t do to you,” not what it must do for you. As I noted at the time,

For a couple thousand years, people were desperately eager to frame constraints that would apply to their governments, that would limit, for example, the government’s ability to expropriate their property, to force them to educate their children in a certain way, or subscribe to certain government-mandated beliefs.

That sort of traditional political freedom is not enough for left-wingers. Ever since Marx decried bourgeois freedom as merely “formal,” the left has set out not to preserve freedom but to remake society according to a utopian scheme.

This is exactly what Obama wants to do. The “tragedy” of the civil-rights movement, he said, is that in focusing on “negative” freedom, it tended to “lose track of the political and community organizing activities on the ground that are able to put together the actual coalitions of power through which you bring about redistributive change.”

Bringing about “redistributive change” is what the Obama administration is all about. 

Morale of the story – PROGRESSIVES and DEMOCRATS – STOP BELIEVING YOU CAN MESS WITH PEOPLES’ LIVES AND GET AWAY WITH IT! 

And go back up the post and see what should be done about Legislators that continue in the process of enslaving the rest of us.

You don’t seem to get it – people HATE BUSYBODIES!